ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1996, Roanoke Times
DATE: Saturday, April 27, 1996 TAG: 9604290098
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A-9 EDITION: METRO
ACKNOWLEDGING Mark Warner's humongous lead in the delegate count, former Northern Virginia Congresswoman Leslie Byrne this week conceded that Warner will be the Democrats' U.S. Senate nominee. But she also raised the possibility of a civil suit over alleged irregularities at some of the local meetings where delegates were selected to the party's state convention in June. A complaint filed by Byrne with the U.S. Justice Department is still pending.
The odor of sour grapes is unmistakable, but never mind that. Whatever their validity, Byrne's charges pale beside the larger problems with Virginia's elections system. The system may be regarded as one big, absurd, albeit legal, irregularity.
Begin with the Democrats' eschewal of a primary for nominating their Senate candidate, thereby ensuring that participation is limited to at most a few thousand Virginians, rather than the hundreds of thousands who likely would vote in a primary.
On this point, Virginia Republicans are doing better - but only because of another irregularity: the dubious power granted incumbents to choose the nominating method. Republican Sen. John Warner has insisted on a primary, to be held June 11, against challenger Jim Miller. Party officials like state Chairman Pat McSweeney have made no bones of their dislike for the idea, preferring instead the more manageable convention method.
Actually, Democrats in some localities did use an "unassembled caucus" this spring, rather than the conventional mass meeting, to choose state-convention delegates. An unassembled caucus is a quasi-primary, also known as a "firehouse primary." Participants may cast votes at their convenience any time during the day.
That Montgomery County's firehouse primary drew 164 voters, while the mass meeting in more populous and more Democratic Roanoke drew only 80, is probably no coincidence.
Even so, both turnouts are preposterously small. "It's hard to get people enthused," said a Democrat at the Roanoke meeting. "We've got an election in Virginia every year."
He's right to draw the connection. If its disinclination to hold primaries is one systemic irregularity, Virginia's crazy-quilt elections calendar is another.
The Republicans' Senate primary, for example, is just a month and a half away - but even before then, cities and towns across Virginia will have held May 7 councilmanic elections. Some places also held primaries on March 5 to choose party nominees for council posts. None of these dates, of course, need coincide with bond-issue or other referendums, like Roanoke County's April 2 vote on a proposed school-bond issue. Oh, and let's not forget the Nov. 5 presidential and congressional elections.
That's just 1996. In 1997 will come elections for governor, the Virginia House of Delegates, city constitutional officers (except clerk of court), county supervisors (where applicable) and county school boards (where applicable). In 1998 will be municipal council elections, city school boards and congressional elections. In 1999 it'll be the state Senate and House of Delegates, county supervisors, county school boards (where applicable) and county constitutional officers (including clerk of court). Come the year 2000
This schedule is unnecessarily complicated and wearying. And it shares with participation-suppressing nominating methods the biggest irregularity of all: serving the politicians' rather than the voters' convenience.
Virginia voters deserve a break. Just hold regular elections only in even-numbered years, and hold all general elections in November, preceded by primaries on a uniform date.
LENGTH: Medium: 69 lines KEYWORDS: POLITICSby CNB